Saturday, July 12, 2008

Sexism and silence

Saturday. Planned to blog last night but we ended up watching Stop-Loss (which we'll be discussing at Third) and I lost track of time. I'm reading the e-mails and Sally wrote. This is my reader Sally and not community member Sally. She's been a reader for about six or seven months at least and writes several times a week. Her only complaint is generally that I didn't praise Ava and C.I.'s TV commentaries enough each Monday. :D She loves those and found about them here so I'll take credit for that.

But she e-mailed because she wanted something addressed and I'll address it. It's about the continued ignoring of sexism. At Danny Schechter's blog, he writes:

Personal Note: When people challenge me by obsessively posting adolescent and snide comments, and when, I then find I cannot authenticate their identities, or reach them to engage in any dialogue or discussion because they hide behind anonymous and deceptive emails, phony names and slime ball personal putdowns, I chose to treat them as the spammers they are and delete their comments.
Strong views are welcome like this one expressed by the real Mikhail Bakunin, not the poseur who has appropriated/disgraced his name:
“But I recognize no infallible authority, even in special questions; consequently, whatever respect I may have for the honesty and the sincerity of such or such an individual, I have no absolute faith in any person.”
I know posting this is like throwing red meat to the ravenous…

She pointed me to her comment and one by another woman.

Sally Says:
You can’t verify negative comments? If that’s in reference to me, I don’t put my real e-mail address in that little box anymore than I give out my unlisted number.Sorry Danny, women online are a little smarter than you. We have to be. We’re used to harassment. And the lies that our information will never be shared. John Kerry told me that too. The Obama campaign got my unlisted home number in February how? Kerry’s the only candidate I’d ever contributed to and I’ve never given a cent to the DNC. After they kept calling, I did start contributing … to Hillary’s campaign. When I did, I made up a phone number.I also don’t need one of your laughable “I’m not a sexist” emails. I believe I read about those online elsewhere. You get to feel good about yourself as you browbeat a woman into thinking it’s all in her head! Pass, Schechter, pass. July 11th, 2008 at 3:01 pmHeather Says:
Agree with Sally. [My real email address is listed.] And why have these private conversations anyway? A lot of people have left comments regarding the election. My belief is that sexism played a part here as well as elsewhere. Maybe you should address or ‘dissect’ that, Mr. Schechter, instead of trying to contact people via their e-mail addresses? Warning, contact me and I have no problem passing it along. I’m the one who got the lunatic e-mail from DL saying he supports Barack Obama because “he risked jail by doing drugs.” DL really made himself the joke of the web. Sally, the thing you saw online, did it start with a “R”? July 11th, 2008 at 8:47 pm

I don't know that Danny was talking about deleting comments about what Sally's left. (She says that was her second comment left.) But what I do know is that there's no excuse for not addressing sexism.

Over half the world is female. If you're billing yourself as a "News Dissector," then you're supposed to dissect the news.

Bonnie Erbe (of PBS' To The Contrary), Marie Cocco (whose columns are syndicated by the Washington Post) and Katie Couric (CBS Evening News) all weighed in recently on the sexism. In addition, Cokie Roberts talked about it. That's the sexism used to take down Hillary Clinton's campaign. Katie Couric is a mainstream media type and an anchor. That alone would make the topic news for a news dissector. Marie Cocco is a columnist to the left. Bonnie Erbe appears to me to be an independent. (Of party and thought.) Early on Gloria Steinem and Robin Morgan called it out and were attacked because, apparently, what's more fun than attacking women?

(Ava and C.I. refer to that craze as "Bash-the-Bitch." And point out that it's one woman after another.)

Now along with it directly effecting over half the population of the world, it effects all of us. Add in that a large portion of Danny's readers or readers he would like to have would include women. So why is it that he won't address the issue?

He won't address it.

Supposedly he's doing Media Channel. Well the media deployed sexism non-stop. That's a media issue. When do we have that conversation?

I have no idea why he won't talk about it.

But FAIR hasn't given a damn either.

Sidenote, it's real funny that so many on the left wanted to smear Gloria Steinem and Robin Morgan with false charges of not minimizing racism but CounterSpin just invited on a woman who appropriated the long term work of a woman of color. They don't give a damn about racism anymore than they do about sexism. When someone gets applause for a piece of writing and 'forgets' to mention that she found the bulk of it in the work of a woman of color, you don't invite her on as a guest. Not only did she appropriate, she started a flame war that caused the woman to stop blogging for awhile. But CounterSpin decided that was the 'expert' to go to. Who knows where she got her (fumbling) talking points from?

Sexism was used non-stop.

If the media is your beat, you need to cover it.

If you ignore it, you're not much a critic.

If it's being ignored by so many (and it is), isn't that the reason you exist?

Danny Schechter, at his best, addresses the stuff that needs to be said but isn't being said.

I don't read as much as I used to. I don't read most of the people as much as I used to because there's no real 'independence' in 'independent' media.

But I do know he has been traveling a lot lately.

So I don't think (my opinion) it is: "I'm just going to ignore this."

I think it's more of a "I'll put it on my list of things to get to."

But it's not something that can wait.

And when you're steering people to good press on Barack, you are taking part in the coverage of the election. So you need to make the time to cover the issue of sexism.

You've had months to do so and not done so. You need to step up to the plate.

If you don't, there's really no reason for you to exist as a News Dissector.

Change the name or something because it's not descriptive anymore.

I also agree that nonsense of private conversations is nonsense.

And if you do those and never write about sexism at your site, it really says to me that you are avoiding dealing with it.

Message intended or not, that's what's received.

I'm not going to get into a private conversation with Danny Schechter. If he wants to comment at his site, he can. (And he doesn't have to link to me.)

The problem is the silence and a private e-mail isn't going to rectify the problem.

I could talk about it in terms of Cokie Roberts but I know Ava and C.I. are toying around with that topic for a future feature at Third. (Cokie Roberts did not use sexism. She was one who decried it. That's all I can say because I know what Ava and C.I. may say.) But there has been enough comments from women who had nothing to gain by calling it out and there's been enough silence to their comments.

It is a problem and it needs to be acknowledged and addressed.

Danny made time to link to Norman Solomon's garbage this week. With Danny, I am willing to continue reading and offer the benefit of the doubt. Solomon's a joke now.

(C.I. likes Danny and Norman. These thoughts are my own and should not be seen as reflecting C.I.'s thoughts. Since I'm calling Norman a joke, if I thought Danny was, I might as well. In for a penny, in for a pound. I'm not calling Danny a joke because I don't think he is one.)

"I am independent media," Solomon's pitch should now go, "and I'm a delegate to the Democratic National Convention for Barack Obama."

Do you see a problem? I do. And 'independent' media wants to complain about the revolving door between politics and journalism?

Solomon's no longer a media critic. He's just a waste of time. A non-stop advertisement for Barack Obama.

Danny's not gotten there yet.

But a thing he wrote this week (no link because I am writing late and I don't have time to hunt it down) where he was talking about "halfway for LBJ" and, however he intended it, it read to me like, "Let's all vote for Barack. He's the best chance."

You know what I think I'll do? I think I'll donate to PBS exclusively from now on. Want to know why? It's our best chance.

Screw Media Channel, screw the other 'independent' outlets, I'll use my money wisely. That's by going with 'independet' PBS. And I'll toss a few dollars to NPR as well.

They aren't left, I know, but they are our best chance. Of getting a few morsels. And we need morsels. We should settle for and strive towards morsels, right?

Wrong?

I think it's wrong. But it's the same argument anyone not in the mainstream is making when they start pushing Barack on 'electable' (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean).

You can't be the underdog and root on the big dog.

That's not how it works. You can't tell people, "We have to be practicle."

Media Channel's had financial issues before. And it depends upon its loyal base to continue. So for someone in Danny's position to advocate for 'practical' strikes me as advocating for his own downfall.

At his best (when he's not on the road and tossing it together -- not insulting him, I toss it together to far less effect here every day), he does something that no one else can do or will even try. But he's one lonely voice more often than not.

By 'electable' arguments, I should forgoe his outlet and others and focus on the 'movers and sharkers'.

Along with addressing sexism, I'd offer another (unasked for) suggestion to Danny: Not another link to Barack news, not another mention, until time was made to mention either (or both) Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.

Media Channel, as I understand it, is Danny's dream. I imagine it's very hurtful when you've been doing something that no one else has (and Danny does a lot of ground breaking work) and when other 'independent' outlets start handing out credit, they ignore you.

Well you don't get my sympathy for that when you ignore other underdogs.

Two New Nader Videos
Posted by The Nader Team on Friday, July 11, 2008 at 10:53:00 AM
Here's is your task for today.
Drop a $20 bill on Nader/Gonzalez.
Why $20?
Because we want to get to $20,000 by the end of the day.
On our way to 15 states.
And $60,000.
By July 20.
We are now at over $15,000.
In just two days.
So, $20,000 by the end of the day shouldn't be a heavy lift.
(If we get there early, take us to $25,000. We're easy.)
On our way to 15 states.
And then 45 states.
By September 20.
Nader/Gonzalez is the positivo campaign.
Two rules here at Nader/Gonzalez headquarters:
Rule Number One: No whining.
And Rule Number Two: Get it done.
It's not that we don't take our world seriously.
We do.
But whining and negativo man attitude doesn't get us where we need to go.
Which is 45 states by September 20.
Take the telecom immunity/spying bill that Obama voted for, McCain dodged, and Bush signed into law.
It's an unconstitutional law.
Did we whine and cry about it?
No, we did not.
We spoke out against it.
We're running this campaign, in part, to defend the Fourth Amendment and the Constitution.
And we've produced an awesome video denouncing the new law.
Or take ballot access.
Our young roadtrippers are busting it all around the country to leap the ballot access hurdles the Democrats and Republicans have erected to make life miserable for us.
But we refuse to be miserable.
Check out this neat video about our roadtrippers in Nevada.
No whining there.
We tried to get on the ballot in 2004 but only made it on 34 states. (We're shooting for 45 this time around.)
Why only 34 states?
One reason: The Democrats organized an underground campaign to knock us off.
When we say this, people don't believe us.
But just yesterday, a grand jury in Pennsylvania indicted twelve Democratic political operatives for the illegal use of millions of dollars in taxpayers' funds, resources and state employees for political campaign purposes. (See Nader/Gonzalez press release here.)
The grand jury found that as many as 50 Democratic House Caucus staff members contributed “a staggering number of man-hours” to successfully knock Ralph Nader off the ballot in 2004.
A House Democratic employee testified before the grand jury that “everybody was working on this.”
“A veritable Army” of Democratic staffers were enlisted in the effort to deny Nader ballot status, the grand jury found.
It was virtually a caucus-wide endeavor and many of the employees spent an entire week on the Nader petition challenge, the grand jury found.
This is a scandal of immense proportions.
And twelve Democrats in Pennsylvania now stand charged with crimes.
Attorneys General Oregon, Illinois and Ohio - three states where Democrats successfully knocked us off in 2004 - should launch similar investigations.
This year, we're not taking no for an answer.
We're building our funds to secure ballot access and to fight back if they come after us again.
So, please, drop a $20 bill now on Nader/Gonzalez.
We're fighting not just for 2008 - but for future generations of independent citizen activists, candidates and campaigners.
(In case you missed it, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals knocked out a requirement that only residents of Arizona be allowed to petition in the state. Ralph Nader challenged this requirement as unconstitutional We're hoping to carry this victory to other states that have similar requirements. See story here.)
We're a positivo locomotive.
We've got the Big Mo.
Nothing will stop us now.
Together, we are making a difference.
Onward
The Nader Team
PS: We invite your comments to the blog.
Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, July 11, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, 2 US soldiers classified MIA/POW are discovered dead, the Green Party convention kicked off yesterday and runs through Sunday and more.

Starting with war resistance. Patrick Arden (Metro) reported earlier this week on the NYC demonstrations to show support for Canadian war resisters and noted Matthis Chiroux:

Wearing his dog tags and waving a copy of the U.S. Constitution, Matthis Chiroux is a sergeant in the Army's Individual Ready Reserve. Last summer he was honorably discharged after five years of active duty that included a stint in Afghanistan. In February he received a reactivation order. "I was supposed to report for deployment to Iraq on June 15," said Chiroux, 24, who intends to stay in Brooklyn. "They'll have to arrest me."

On IVAW, Joy Wiltermuth (Downtown Express) profiles Fabian Bouthillette who "is the secretary and outreach coordinator for Iraq Veterans Against the War's New York chapter, which shares space with the War Resisters' League in Noho, at 339 Lafayette St." as he lays out his last night years (he enlisted at 18). He explains, "I'm a guy who grew up ppor. It was just that simple. . . I was quick to jump on it [leaving the Navy -- he did not self-checkout]. I was not going to work hard to support the war machine anymore. Once I came to that realization, I could no longer do it."

Meanwhile in Canada, Judge Robert Barnes' decision in US war resister Joshua Key's case last week opens up a number of possibilities for war resisters. Dee Knight (Workers World) reports on the latest and also provides the background such as: "Joshua Key went to Canada with his wife Brandi and their four small children following 16 months living underground in the United States after he decided not to return to Iraq. He served as a combat engineer in Iraq for eight months in 2003. His book, 'The Deserter's Tale,' has been an international best seller. He said he and his family have felt support from 'about 95 percent of the Canadian people'."

Last night we were noting continued failure of the war resistance 'movement' to get across the point (or even be aware of it) that Canada gave asylum to deserters during Vietnam (and didn't ask: "Were you drafted or did you enlist?") and reviewing real time press noting war resisters (who were deserters) like Jeff Enger, Jack Colhoun, Victor Schwarzmann who did make lives for themselves in Canada. And it's all wiped away/ignored by today's 'movement' which continues to blater on about "draft dodgers" when there is no draft today so it's really not pertinent to the discussion but certainly does allow the right-wing to dismiss calls for asylumn by insisting, "Well that was draft dodgers. There's no draft today!" Today, the the Wall St. Journal's offered the editorial "AWOL in Canada" which shows 'reason' and 'sympathy' by stating, "Vietnam-era draft dodgers were breaking the law, but at least they could claim to be avoiding conscription. Today's U.S. soldiers and reserves are volunteers, who enlist knowing full well that they could be sent overseas and into combat." Repeating: Five years the 'movement' has wasted. Five years of gas bagging about a draft -- when there is no draft today. Five years of insisting that Canada took in draft dodgers -- when there are no draft dodgers today. Five years of blathering on about crap that doesn't matter. The only point today's 'movement' should have made regarding Canada granting asylum to today's war resisters was: "They should because they welcomed deserters during Vietnam." That's not a difficult sentence. And, unlike what the 'movement' offers today, it is factually correct. Until the basics are correct -- until they are stressed over and over -- the 'movement' will continue to muddle along. "Almost 40 years ago we accepted deserters from an illegal war" is the talking point the movement in Canada should be using and the US side should be noting, "Hey, 40 years ago, they accepted deseters from an illegal war." Canada is not being asked to do anything it hasn't done the past.

Early this morning, Patrick Donahue (Bloomberg News) reported AP was stating -- but the DoD has not confirmed -- that Alex Jimenez and Byron Fouty's corpses have been discovered while David Aguila (AP) cited Fouty's step-father as confirmation that the corpses of both were "found in the Iraqi village of Jurf as Sakhr." Jeannie Nuss and Milton J. Valencia (Boston Globe) speak with Ramon "Andy" Jimenez (Alex's father) who states that, in his grief, "It comforts you when you accept something, and Alex did what he wanted to do." Korie Wilkins (Detroit Free Press) quotes Byron's friend Ashley Tremble stating, "What was important [for him] was the here-and-now. There is no bad to Byron" while his mother Hilary Meunier states, "A part of me believes he's already gone, but I still have hope." And please note, there's no mention of his body being found in Wilkins' article. David Aguilar spoke with his step-father Gordon Dibler who said Byron's corpse was found on Thursday. Boston's NECN has video of the family of Alex Jimenez gathering and lighting candles. O'Ryan Johnson (Boston Herald) quotes Ramon Jimenez stating of his son, "He always had the hope that he would return back to the city. But due to the nature of where he was, it was difficult for him to return alive." Mark E. Vogler (Eagle Tribune) reports that, in Lawrence, "American flags fly at half staff on municipal buildings throughout the city today in honor of the late Army Sgt. Alex Jimenez." This afternoon the US Dept of Defense released a statement: "The Department of Defense today announced the deaths of two soldiers previously listed as "Missing-Captured" while supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. On July 10, the Armed Forces Medical Examiner positively identified human remains recovered in Iraq July 9 to be those of two soldiers who had been previously listed as 'Missing-Captured.' . . . Jimenez and Fouty were part of a patrol that was ambushed by enemy forces south of Baghdad on May 12, 2007. They were assigned to the 4th Battalion, 31st Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), Fort Drum, N.Y. The Department of Defense previously announced the names of soldiers killed in the attack. They were Pfc. Joseph J. Anzack, Jr., 20, of Torrance, Calif.; Sgt. 1st Class James D. Connell, Jr., 40, of Lake City, Tenn.; Pfc. Daniel W. Courneya, 19, of Nashville, Mich.; Cpl. Christopher E. Murphy, 21, of Lynchburg, Va.; and Sgt. Anthony J. Schober, 23, of Reno, Nev."

On Saturday an attack took place outside Mahmudiya. Damien Cave (New York Times) reported: "A cooridnated attack on seven American soldiers an Iraqi Army interpreter Saturday morning south of Baghdad left five of them dead and three missing". Initial reports, based on what the US military was saying, included that five US service members were killed. The US military corrected this on Sunday: 4 US soldiers died as did 1 Iraqi translator. Three US soldiers are still missing. Scott Canon (McClatchy Newspapers) reported that approximately 4,000 US service members were searching for the 3 missing soldiers on Sunday. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reports that at least one of the five dead had "gunshot woundes, though it was unclear whether he was shot before or after blasts enveloped the soldiers' two vehicles in flames, said U.S. Army Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, a military spokesman." Joshua Partlow (Washington Post) notes that the group was "parked in two Humvees in an area 12 miles west of Mahmudiyah" when the attack took place with "a roadside bomb . . . followed by gunfire, officials said. The two vehicles went up in flames and were spotted 15 minutes later by a surveillance drone, after a nearby unit that heard explosions could not make contact with the Humvees. The extent of the damage made it difficult to identify the slain soldiers." Stephen Farrell and Tom Baldwin (Times of London) note that the Islamic State in Iraq has claimed, via a website, responsibility for the raid and that they have the three missing US soldiers. Scott Canon (McClatchy Newspapers) noted that the grop has "offered no proof". CBS and AP report that the group claiming to have the three American soldiers issued a warning: "'If you want their safety do not look for them,' the Islamic State of Iraq said on a militant web site. 'You should remember what you have done to our sister Abeer in the same area,' the statement said, referring to five American soldiers who were charged in the rape and killing of 14-year-old Abeer Qassim al-Janabi and the killings of her parents and her younger sister last year. Three soldiers have pleaded guilty in the case." AFP notes that, in June of last year, two US soldiers were captured and their "bodies . . . were later found outside a power station south of Baghdad, mutilated and bearing signs of torture." That attack was also seen as resulting from the gang-rape and murder of Abeer in Mahmoudiyah on March 12, 2006 and, as Gregg Zoroya (USA Today) reported last September, Justin Watt came forward with what he was hearing about Abeer and her family when the June attack on US soldiers took place. Though the statement put up by the group claiming to have the 3 missing US soldiers is cited often in part, most outlets have avoided noting the mention of Abeer. (But then many avodied reporting on the Article 32 hearing last August or much that has happened since. As CBS and AP noted, 3 US soldiers have confessed to their part. Steven D. Green, who has been portrayed as the ringleader in press accounts as well as the testimonies of those who have pleaded guilty, maintains he is innocent.) Julie Rawe and Aparisim Ghosh (Time) reported last June, "Abeer's brother Mohammed, 13, told TIME he once watched his sister, frozen in fear, as a U.S. soldier ran his index finger down her cheek. Mohammed has since learned that soldier's name: Steven Green."

ICCC has moved the two over the total for deaths in Iraq since the start of the illegal war bringing that total to 4118. The third missing soldier was Joseph Anzack who was later found dead (and it listed in the DoD announcement). As for Steven D. Green? Green's scheduled trial was postpone for a quilting bee and, apparently, hasn't been rescheduled even though that was months ago. (All other US soldiers involved in the incident entered pleas of guilty.)

On the subject of Iraqi women, Zaineb Naji tells her story at Baghdad Life (Wall St. Journal) and explains that the decrease in violence (that's how she judges it) means some tentative steps back towards the time before the start of the Iraq War, "After sectarian violence increased after the Samarra shrine bombing in February 2006, fundamentalist insurgents and Shiite militias started to forbid women to drive cars, saying it was unacceptable according to Islamic law. They threatened to kidnap women drivers or kill them and leave their bodies by the road. They also said women would have a similar fate if they didn't wear the traditional Islamic clothing -- an abaya and a hijab (head scarf). So women, including me, stopped driving. I stopped driving even in my neighborhood, which made me feel depressed because I felt like I had lost one of my rights. I had always worn a hijab, but women who didn't started to wear one to protect themselves. Not driving affected my work as a reporter and it was difficult to use other means of transportation, such as taxis or buses. I couldn't take my children to school or pick them up, or even go shopping alone. In the early 1950s, Iraq was one of the first Arab countries that allowed women to drive cars. During the Hussein regime, women drivers were very common on the streets and women even drove public buses or tractors in the countryside."

From life on the ground in Iraq to in the air. Iraq does not control their air space currently and the treaty being discussed by the White House and the puppet government in Baghdad had one puppet so excited that maybe Iraq could control its own air space! So what's going on in the air in the meantime. The Jerusalem Post reports the back and forth in Iraq as to whether Irsraeli Air Force has been utilizing Iraqi air space to prepare "for a possible attack against Iran in its airspace" (the article has the latest official statement from Iraq as "no" it is not happening). UPI carries the denials from the US government and the Israeli government. On claims, Ann Scott Tyson and Dan Eggan (Washington Post) report the latest claim of success just around the corner -- Lt Gen James Dubik Happy Talked Congress yesterday: "The ground forces will mostly be done by middle of next year; their divisions, brigades and battalions are on a good timeline." Can you die from a whopper? I believe Bully Boy's false claims of yellow cake uranium demonstrate that many can.

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that left six people wounded, a suspected bombing attempt outside Samarra that led to 4 suspects being shot dead by Iraqi police.

Turning to the race for US president, Drew Pritt denies masturbating in public. Yesterday's snapshot note Austin Cassidy's Independent Political Report article on Drew Pritt's attack on presumed Green Party presidential nominee Cynthia McKinney. Pritt only continued his attack after the article published by taking to the comments section repeatedly. Insisting, "I do not stomp squirrels, or masturbate in public, or do the other things I am accuesd of," and blaming malicious gossip on any rumors to the contrary, he then goes on to repeat an obvious lie, that his hero Jesse Johnson will be "denied a nomination, by a woman who used the Green Party REPORTEDLY to pay off her debt, before she switched parties." That is a lie. It's an ugly lie. And while whining about the meaness towards him, Drew Pritt wants to lie about McKinney. Democratic Party member Pritt (who's run for several state offices in Arkansas) maintains, "If the Green Party is to thrive it has to appeal to progressives like myself. Cynthia McKinney does not appeal but repels." Again, Democrats need to stay out of the selection of the Green Party's presidential nominee. He does not know what he's talking about (McKinney's "HIGH WATER MARK" is not 3%, she's defined victory -- if she's the nominee -- as 5%). If any Greens are offended by Pritt's attempts to derail their own selection (and they should be), hopefully, they'll remember that in 2012 because a number of 'high profile' Greens damn sure didn't feel bad about butting into the Democratic primary. Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) annouces the "hope to have video up sometime today" of the ongoing Green Party Convention taking place in Chicago through Sunday and notes, "There is a great feeling that Cynthia McKinney will be the next candidate." Regardless of whom the nominee is, the acceptance speech will be made Saturday and a press conference with the presidential and vice-presidential nominee will be held after. Yesterday, Kat Swift's questionnaire response was not mentioned. It had not been posted. It still hasn't. ("Questionnaire from Kat Swift will be posted shortly.") Since she has publicly asked people to donate to Cynthia's campaign, it may not end up posted. The convention isn't just about the national ticket. On the charitable side, Green Party 2004 v.p. nominee Pat LaMarche is overseeing "donations for area shelters" and states, "I would like for folks with less agreeable resting places for their heads to know that Greens came to town and that we did not forget them." A noble effort and one that the big-money RNC and DNC might consider emulating. Green Party Congressional candidate Steve Alesch spoke yesterday at the start of the convention. Patrick Ferrell (Suburban Chicago News) notes that was one of two "high-profile positions at the group's national convention" for 2 "local Green Party candidates" and explains the other, IVAW's Jason Wallace, was slotted for "a Friday morning speech" and "selected to serve as the convention's election administrator. In that role he will oversee the casting of delegate votes for the presidential and vice presidential nominations as well as the approval of the national party platform." Tuesday Jason Wallace's campaign announced: "Veterans issues are of key importance to 11th Congressional district Green Party candidate Jason Wallace. Wallace, the only veteran in the race, is calling for several key changes in the government's approach to caring for those who have served in the United States military. These include changes in funding and coverage as well as his support for the idea of replacing Silver Cross in Joliet with a VA hospital. . . . Wallace calls for complete, mandatory funding for the VA. This is an idea that is supported by voters in the district." [The press release will run in full tomorrow, there isn't room for it in the snapshot.] Ron (Green Party Watch) reports: "Jason Wallace, Illinois candidate for the 11th district CD, noted that he is running in one of the top five competitive races in America. Wallace noted that his campaign is committed to run for ten thousand dollars only, 10K in 08, versus the multimillion dollar campaigns his Republican and Democrat opponents are working with. Education is probably his number one issue, and he has seen first hand the impact of underfunded education on middle class families. Wallace is also a member of Veterans for Peace, attended Winter Soldier, Wallace was serving in the Iraq 'Occupation'. The war is obviously a big issue for Wallace. Wallace also wants to make his district in Illinois a leader in the production of "green manufacturing"."

Though the votes haven't been made (let alone counted) National Journal states: "Road to the White House features Bob Barr, and will cover Green Party WH candidate Cynthia McKinney's Green Party Convo speech (C-Span, SUN, 6:30 pm/9:30 pm)." (The other Cynthia, the evil faux-gressive, will be on The Chris Matthews Show so she'll probably make time for a hate-out to McKinney.) The Minneapolis Star Tribune notes, "Former U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney's trek back from defeat takes her to Chicago this weekend and an improbable political rebirth. She is expected to be nominated as the presidential candidate for the Green Party of the United States and could appear on the ballot in as many as 36 states." Grist magazine picks up on McKinney's v.p. choice, "Yesterday hip-hop activist Rosa Clemente accepted McKinney's invitation to run as the VP candidate. More to come on the Green ticket soon." NYC IMC offers, "Clemente, born in the South Bronx, is a graduate of SUNY Albany and Cornell Univeristy." What About Our Daughters? explains that, if McKinney is the nominee, this is the third time two women of color would be on the ticket with the first being Lenora Fulani and Maria Elizabeth Munoz in 1992 (New Alliance Party) and Monica Moorehead and Gloria La Riva (Workers World Party) in 1996. Deanna Taylor (Dee's 'Dotes) observes, "It will be interesting to see how Cynthia McKinney's choice affects her chances for obtaining the GPUS Presidential nomination." Wake Me Now advocates for Cynthia, "Former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who seems poised to capture the Green Party presidential nomination, in Chicago, this month, 'is at this juncture in history the only vehicle through which progressives can both register their outrage at Barack Obama and begin the process of rebuilding a mass, Black-led movement for real social change.' Meanwhile, the frequency of Obama's Right turns seem to increase in direct proportion to the nearness of the general election. 'Surely no one with a brain any longer believes that Obama is a closet progressive, or even a genuine liberal.' The question is, How many progressives will put their votes and resources to honorable use?" Matt (The Underview) notes Cynthia McKinney will be among his guests on Shared Sacrifice Saturday which airs "from Noon to 2:00 PM mountain time" and is also downloadable. Rick Pearson (Baltimore Sun) sums up Cynthia's positions on the issues: "In her presidential campaign, she has pushed for a quick end to the Iraq War and has promoted impeachment proceedings against the Bush administration. She also has advocated a 10-point human rights plan that includes integrity in the nation's voting system, full employment and reparations to African Americans over slavery--which has been a plank in the Green Party platform." Cynthia's campaign site has reposted an essay by Vivian Berryhill which asserts, "Securing the Green Party's 2008 standard-bearer position would bestow on McKinney the historic title of 'first' African American woman to be on the ballot as a viable candidate of a major party for President of the United States. That title alone will not only lessen the aura surrounding Barack Obama's position as the 'first' African American male presidential nominee, but she may also siphon off just-enough left-wing, African American, and women voters, to sink both their chances for victory in the Fall." The one and only Roseanne weighed in Wednesday at her site (Roseanne World) stating: "for president GREEN PARTY. . . .the party for feminists. Let's replace pelosi with sheehan as soon as possible, and then as fast as we can replace the entire woman hating democrat party with a green ecofeminist progressive socialist one that really works and is not afraid to make campaign finance reform a priority." Pacifica Radio will broadcast a three hour special on Sunday "as the convention comes to a close) that will stream online at the Pacifica website (noon to 3:00 p.m. EST; 11:00 a.m. to 2 p.m. Central and 9:00 a.m. to noon PST).

Barack Obama is the presumed Democratic Party nominee. Susan (Random Thoughts) notes Tom Hayden's July 4th moment of "WHAT'S WRONG WITH HIS EYES!" (Mia Farrow in Rosemary's Baby -- the response is "He has his father's eyes.") and advises, "Well, Tom, maybe you SHOULD have critically looked at Obama's slipperiness on this and many other issues before making a fool out of yourself." I have to disagree with Susan on this because if Tom Hayden couldn't make a fool out of himself, what would he have to offer at this point? Yes, I really agree with Susan (though Tom-Tom has nothing left to offer) and Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) also notes Hayden and Hayden's (drug induced?) belief that a 'movement' exists for Barack and it can and will (didn't happen with FISA) pressure him: "Nothing of that nature will occur, because Hayden and other progressives are not organizing to make it occur. They are too concerned with remaining 'for' Obama. Not only are Hayden's and Fletcher's peculiar 'movements' without political content - they emerge like magic, requiring none of the hard work of organizing. And just how were those popular 'rising expectations' that Hayden speaks of supposed to express themselves? Progressives waited until it was far too late to bring these 'expectations' - to whatever extent they exist - to bear on the candidate. Obama coasted through the primaries with virtually no dissent from his loyal progressives, and now sees his way clear to publicly dismiss them, so as to never again be 'tagged as being on the Left'." Tom-Tom's probably hopping from foot to foot and straining to contain himself -- it's truly been years (decades) since he received so much attention. Black Agenda Report -- Ford, Margaret Kimberly and Bruce Dixon -- are not 'waking up,' they always called it like it was and if Tom-Tom needs tuturing, he might try contacting them. In the meantime, he can read Kimberley's latest: "All hell broke loose and tongues wagged endlessly and needlessly because of an accurate statement made by the candidate first husband and former president Bill Clinton. 'It is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war. There's no difference in your (Obama's) voting record, and Hillary's, ever since. Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen'. The words fairy tale resonated in millions of ears, but the validity of Clinton's comments were lost on a public incapable of distinguishing fact from fiction, or trivia from substance." Added note, the Green Party will be discussing impeachment at their convention. "Calls for impeachment have become so common in the last few years that we forget how recently it has entered the political arsenal. Once viewed as a blunderbuss, it is now used as a bludgeon." That's from Jo Freeman's review of David E. Kyvig's The Age of Impeachment (link goes to her own site, it's also available at Senior Women Web here). In terms of the current administration, you can refer to Jason Leopold's latest at The Public Record. While the Green Party convention goes on, Bill Moyers Journal explores the GOP and, no doubt, has Cynthia, Ralph and Bob Barr penciled in for an upcoming show in order to maintain the PBS diversity mandate. Tonight also provides a new feature "What's your vision for the future of the American Dream?" It's a segment tonight (tonight in most markets) and will also be an online feature. Click here for YouTube video.

Here's is your task for today.
Drop a $20 bill on Nader/Gonzalez.
Why $20?
Because we want to get to $20,000 by the end of the day.
On our way to 15 states.
And $60,000.
By July 20.
We are now at over $15,000.
In just two days.
So, $20,000 by the end of the day shouldn't be a heavy lift.
(If we get there early, take us to $25,000. We're easy.)
On our way to 15 states.
And then 45 states.
By September 20.
Nader/Gonzalez is the positivo campaign.
Two rules here at Nader/Gonzalez headquarters:
Rule Number One: No whining.
And Rule Number Two: Get it done.
It's not that we don't take our world seriously.
We do.
But whining and negativo man attitude doesn't get us where we need to go.
Which is 45 states by September 20.
Take the telecom immunity/spying bill that Obama voted for, McCain dodged, and Bush signed into law.
It's an unconstitutional law.
Did we whine and cry about it?
No, we did not.
We spoke out against it.
We're running this campaign, in part, to defend the Fourth Amendment and the Constitution.
And we've produced an awesome video denouncing the new law.
Or take ballot access.
Our young roadtrippers are busting it all around the country to leap the ballot access hurdles the Democrats and Republicans have erected to make life miserable for us.
But we refuse to be miserable.
Check out this neat video about our roadtrippers in Nevada.
No whining there.
We tried to get on the ballot in 2004 but only made it on 34 states. (We're shooting for 45 this time around.)
Why only 34 states?
One reason: The Democrats organized an underground campaign to knock us off.
When we say this, people don't believe us.
But just yesterday, a grand jury in Pennsylvania indicted twelve Democratic political operatives for the illegal use of millions of dollars in taxpayers' funds, resources and state employees for political campaign purposes. (See Nader/Gonzalez press release here.)
The grand jury found that as many as 50 Democratic House Caucus staff members contributed "a staggering number of man-hours" to successfully knock Ralph Nader off the ballot in 2004.
A House Democratic employee testified before the grand jury that "everybody was working on this."
"A veritable Army" of Democratic staffers were enlisted in the effort to deny Nader ballot status, the grand jury found.
It was virtually a caucus-wide endeavor and many of the employees spent an entire week on the Nader petition challenge, the grand jury found.
This is a scandal of immense proportions.
And twelve Democrats in Pennsylvania now stand charged with crimes.
Attorneys General Oregon, Illinois and Ohio - three states where Democrats successfully knocked us off in 2004 - should launch similar investigations.
This year, we're not taking no for an answer.
We're building our funds to secure ballot access and to fight back if they come after us again.
So, please, drop a $20 bill now on Nader/Gonzalez.
We're fighting not just for 2008 - but for future generations of independent citizen activists, candidates and campaigners.
(In case you missed it, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals knocked out a requirement that only residents of Arizona be allowed to petition in the state. Ralph Nader challenged this requirement as unconstitutional We're hoping to carry this victory to other states that have similar requirements. See story here.)
We're a positivo locomotive.
We've got the Big Mo.
Nothing will stop us now.
Together, we are making a difference.
Onward

Followers

About Me

I'm Michael, Mike to my friends. College student working his way through. I'm also Irish-American and The New York Times can kiss my Irish ass. And check out Trina's Kitchen on my links, that's my mother's site.